While the editorial board disagreed with Breslin in several key areas, including the issue of lawyer-legislators being required to disclose their clients, it offered the endorsement. It also praised Martland as a “credible challenger with a reasonable grasp of the issues.”

Mr. Martland, a political newcomer, is a credible challenger with a reasonable grasp of the issues. He offers some ideas to tackle the state’s financial problems, including a freeze on government growth and a top-to-bottom review of government. He is committed to progressive values of equality, choice and reform. He advocates unequivocally for an overhaul of the ethics and campaign finance rules that have let politicians get away with far too much secrecy and self-dealing.

We would have liked to see more depth and detail in his fiscal ideas, particularly in the big-ticket items of health care and education. And we disagree with his position on the death penalty, which he favors for what he calls extreme cases like terrorism.

Still, especially after a term in which the Senate was plagued by chaos and inaction, we should encourage more smart, sensible citizens like Mr. Martland to run for office. Against a lesser opponent, we might see the race differently.

Mr. Breslin, even after 14 years, is not just another incumbent going through the motions. He has had the sometimes unenviable task of having to grapple with what’s good for the state and what’s good for his constituents — many of them state workers. This year, he cast a crucial vote for a budget extender that included state worker furloughs, but also sponsored a resolution opposing them. Though he says it was not his intention, that resolution helped in a successful lawsuit to block the furloughs. We disagreed with his action, but it’s clear he tried to do the best for his constituents while not risking a government shutdown.